When independent Richmond City Council candidate Henry Yao decided to run for public office this year, he quit his day job and started working in overdrive.
“It has not been an easy fight for me. I think I overworked myself and that’s why I got sick in the past few days. It sometimes feels like it’s 24/7,” said Yao, last week, of his campaign.
The 35-year-old cancer survivor quit his job as a youth worker with the City Centre Community Association to negate any conflict of interest working for the City of Richmond. He’s now living on savings and campaigning full-time, visiting community groups day-in, day-out.
“To be able to sit down one to one and have conversations with community groups and decision makers (has been) eye opening,” said Yao, one of 14 independent candidates.
But no matter how many hours Yao puts into his campaign, he faces an uphill battle, especially as an independent.
Incumbent stranglehold
Over Richmond’s past four municipal elections, incumbents (those already elected) have, to say the least, dominated the polls. All in all, the 32 times an incumbent councillor or mayor has run for public office during this time, he or she has been elected 30 times; since 1999 only councillors Kiichi Kumagai and Cynthia Chen have been unseated seeking re-election.
Four longtime councillors are seeking re-election.
Bill McNulty has served on council since 1993; Derek Dang since 1996, save for a one-year absence after a failed run at mayor in 2001; Ken Johnston has spent 14 years on council, off and on since 1993; and, taking the incumbent cake, is Harold Steves, who has served continuously since 1968, save for a four-year gap from 1973-1977, when he served as Richmond’s MLA.
And it’s notable that the other two incumbents seeking re-election — Linda McPhail and Chak Au — were first elected in 2011 after successful runs as trustees on the Richmond Board of Education.
All about the name
So, what accounts for the stranglehold incumbents have on city council? And how do you crack the nut if you’re a new candidate?
According to University of B.C. political science professor Richard Johnston, the biggest advantage incumbents have is name recognition.
“To the extent (voters) see these names all the time and the rival names don’t have much basis to stake a claim that they can do better, incumbents have the advantage,” said Johnston.
Moreover, civic candidates tend to not align themselves publicly with familiar political parties. Steves and trustee candidate Jack Trovato are the exception in making it clear that they are endorsed by the NDP. Others, like council candidate Dan Baxter, has said he campaigns for the BC Liberals. But the fact most candidates don’t campaign on their political allegiances, makes it harder for voters to know if the candidate is someone they support ideologically.
“Municipalities have more homogenous councils. That’s because they’re not as ideological. This raises the information premium as you’re being asked to make a judgment on the city as a whole,” said Johnston.
As such, he noted, “unless there is some dimension, like pro or anti development, it is hard for a citizen to figure out how to navigate and the one clear piece of information is incumbency.”
Steves, who has seen it all, acknowledged name recognition is a big factor and change on council is infrequent unless there’s a major disagreement.
“Unless there’s a major issue, incumbents have always had the advantage,” noted Steves.
He said the last time there was any major change on Richmond’s council was in 1990 with the Terra Nova development, when four councillors were given the voter’s boot for developing the land.
“There’s nothing council has a major disagreement on,” said Steves, adding the closest time that may have happened in the last 15 years was when Richmond First councillors flipped to save the Garden City Lands, and perhaps their seats.
Stagnant or stable?
It may not necessarily be a bad thing that council is so repetitive, according to University of B.C. political scientist Max Cameron.
“It could very well be a good news story. That is to say, people are satisfied with government and don’t see a need for change,” said Cameron.
He said having low voter turnout — as Richmond and most B.C. municipalities have — could also be a symptom of satisfaction with councillors; Richmond’s voter turnout in the last municipal election was 24 per cent.
Conversely, Cameron said people may feel they don’t have the opportunity to participate in politics and/or there aren’t enough choices in the mix.
Constituent dissatisfaction could be at play in Richmond with a record number of council candidates this election – 31 in total.
And while six of the eight incumbent councillors are seeking re-election, the fact longtime councillors Evelina Halsey-Brandt and Linda Barnes are retiring may also give newcomers hope.
Building a network
Incumbents have the advantage of a built-in networks.
“They are plugged into networks of community organizations and professional groups. They get to press the flesh. That enables them to cultivate a sort of profile in the community,” said Cameron.
And that’s what non-incumbents have to develop. Volunteering with a community organization seems to be a prerequisite for running for public office as it allows people to gain name recognition in the absence of the public spotlight. Often, instead of addressing issues and what they will do in the future (and in doing so, presenting more concrete ideas), non-incumbent candidates are likely to first extol their service to the community.
Baxter is a city council candidate for the newly formed Richmond Community Coalition slate. Having lived in Richmond for only just under three years, Baxter doesn’t have the name recognition that some other non-incumbents have, but he said he’s taken to joining community groups, such as Britannia Shipyard Society.
“There’s obviously getting out to the events, being open and accessible and obviously being on volunteer boards and boards of directors and those kinds of things,” said Baxter, who recently worked on campaigns for the BC Liberal Party.
Others have worked with groups, or even taken on activism by forming their own; Carol Day of RITE Richmond helped form the group VAPOR to battle an airline consortium building a jet fuel facility on the Fraser River. Her political partner Michael Wolfe, who has also run for the Green Party, helped form the Garden City Conservation Society. Independent counterpart Alexa Loo, who enjoys name recognition as an Olympic snow boarder from the Vancouver games, volunteers for children in sports. And fellow independent council candidate Jerome Dickey has volunteered for city advisory committees.
Coalition council candidates Kirby Graeme, an on-leave Richmond Fire-Rescue deputy chief, as well as Sal Bhullar, an owner of large farms in east Richmond and mother of local sports hero Arjan Bhullar, both enjoy some name recognition.
“I do agree that name recognition helps,” said Graeme. “Sal’s family has been in Richmond for a long time and the whole Southeast Asian community knows her family. There is a name recognition benefit and, no, I don’t think there’s a crime in that. It’s a good thing we’re out there in the community volunteering our time and making efforts before setting foot in the political ring,” he added.
Independent vs. slate
Choosing to run as an independent versus being aligned with a political party is another decision challengers need to make.
For instance, the Coalition’s board of directors is largely made up of businessmen, developers, and political strategists. As such, it provides a distinct lobbying and organizational advantage.
Graeme said the benefits to having the Coalition behind him means having people with political experience helping organize the campaign.
“If you’re flying as an independent, you’re in tough, and maybe that’s also part of the reason sometimes people don’t get elected the first time; they just don’t have the horsepower behind them,” said Graeme.
Bhullar and Graeme noted a party also brings diversity to the table. Whereas she may be able to speak to one issue, she can turn to others where she may not have all the knowledge.
“Each one of us is bringing something unique,” she said.
On the flip side, many independents claim they don’t want to be tied down to a party line.
As an early organizer with the Coalition, Henry Yao had the opportunity to join the slate but opted not to in order to have a more independent voice.
“In hindsight, I realized there are lots of connections to developers and current political parties,” said Yao.
“I wanted to reflect my community’s voice instead of special interests,” said Yao.
“Even though I realized the chance of me winning is getting less and less as an independent, consciously…I’m more at ease,” he said.
Like Yao, Jennifer Huang is a first time council candidate who chose to run independently, saying she wanted to make decisions herself. Huang visited the Richmond News this week to drop off campaign literature.
When asked how she will get her message out, she replied that she would rely on her church network and neighbourhood connections.
Ethics and money
Further hampering non-incumbents is ethics and money. Many choose not to take large political donations, like organized slates do.
Independent Jerome Dickey cited on his website he would not take donations over $50. He’s been campaigning at Canada Line stations, among other places. Yao also isn’t taking any large donations and said he’ll be knocking on doors next week.
Independent Janos Bergman said his campaign budget is $200. RITE Richmond also vowed not to take large contributions.
In 2011, then independent mayoral candidate Richard Lee was outspent 20-times over by incumbent mayor Malcolm Brodie. This time around he’s formed a political party, Richmond Reform, and seems to have more financial support.
Professor Johnston noted parties elicit more donations.
“There’s some realistic prospect that the dollar will go further, but also, if you’re thinking quid pro quo, it’s better to go to a group of individuals who form council,” he said.
While community participation, party association and money are important, election outreach has, in recent years, taken a turn for the better in one other important way for non-incumbents, particularly independents: and that’s social media.
Yet, in Richmond, it seems not to have reached would-be politicians in a significant manner yet.
Social media
Leading the way on Facebook — with more followers than any other of his political challengers, including organized slates — is Yao.
Yao has 623 likes on his Facebook page and has utilized purchased content. For instance, he sponsored a post whereby he promoted his ideas on increased bylaw education and enforcement for those who park illegally in dangerous places, like fire lanes. Yao’s comments section on his resolution for English signage in the city also sparked significant interest organically.
Part of Yao’s success is his connections to the youth community (he has political organizers, many of whom are university students).
To date, other political slates haven’t tapped into the social media market. For instance, Richmond First, the largest slate, only has 202 likes but mostly posts photo opportunities. The same can be said of the Coalition, although it has 490 likes. RITE Richmond has just 127 likes. The aforementioned groups prefer instead to use their respective websites as their platform’s online vessel.
RITE candidate Michael Wolfe is among the most prominent candidates on Twitter, with 839 followers. As is Don Montgomery, a real estate professional who has about 900 followers and often tweets about Richmond. Not far behind Wolfe and Montgomery on Twitter in terms of followers is Richmond First’s McPhail with 503 followers, although she is by far the most active Tweeter, historically.
Ironically, this “new age” online communications medium is best utilized by Steves, who is 77 years-old but has 1,137 followers, tops among all the candidates.
And what about hosting an Ask Me Anything on Reddit? Forget it. No candidate has dared to venture there.
All-in-all, social media remains a veritable cornucopia of political opportunity for non-incumbents in Richmond to publicly challenge otherwise mostly quiet incumbents.
